But the way the news story casts it the rationale for this judgement was that the couples who brought the case were in LTR and, in some cases having kids. I am convinced that following heterosexual 'norms' are emphatically not a necessary condition (although they remain a quite sufficient condition!) to permit gay couples to marry. I'm unsure that it is an ultimately helpful thing to make this sort of comparison.

I am however, in awe of the couples involved for fighting such a lawsuit. All power to them! When, oh when, will the savage state of Ohio come to terms with this issue? I fear that the natives of Ohio do not oppose the injustices that they must bear with all the vigour they might.....

Don't get your hopes up yet, guys. I live in Iowa, and of course this story has been on the news here. Same-sex marriage will likely be struck down by either the state's supreme court (to which it is being appealed) or will be legislated-against by the Iowa State Assembly.

On the news, it said that until there is some sort of resolution on the issue, couples from across the state can travel to Polk Co. (Des Moines) to get marriage licenses, as the office there has been ordered to grant them. People are already doing so.

On a different note, Iowa has been standing up for gay rights in a number of other important ways recently. This year, Gov. Culver signed a law that bans discrimination in all schools on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identification, although he said he does NOT support gay marriage! Where I live (in Dubuque) anti-discrimination laws were passed both by the city council and the school system. The state is making progress.

If it doesn't happen this time, it will eventually and it doesn't hurt to keep hammering away at it. Sounds like Iowa's doing alright by twisterguy's account. I didn't realize it was so progressive. That's pretty good.

We have a buddy who is a constitutional law scholar. He has been saying for some years that it's the "equal protection" clause that will eventually win it for us - just as it did in the civil rights stuggle in the 60's for black americans.

Politically stacked state and federal courts can only delay it - they can't ultimately stop it. And if we keep the federal legislature from becoming too conservative again, there won't be any constitutional amendments to screw it up, either.

For those of you with a deeper interest in social & racial justice legislation, let me recommend a site: Equal Justice Society

UPDATE: The state's first-EVER legal gay marriage happened this morning in Des Moines, at the home of a Unitarian minister who officiated the ceremony. The couple are two male students who attend Iowa State University in Ames.

However, only two hours after they were married, the same judge who declared the state's ban on same-sex marriages illegal issued a stay on his decision. This means that no new marriage licenses will be issued to gay couples until the case is heard by the Iowa Supreme Court.

Expect this to generate HUGE amounts of controversy in Iowa. A member of the state assembly said that there will almost certainly be a proposal next session to pass a constitutional ban on gay marriage, and the governor (a Democrat!) would be likely to sign such a bill. Also, with all the presidential candidates running around the state, this will throw gay marriage back into the national spotlight.

It'll be interesting to see what the Supreme Court decides. By the way... 4 of its 7 justices were appointed by a Democratic governor.

Good for Iowa! This issue will, eventually, have to be settled by the US Supreme Court: there are simply too different rulings happening in the states for them not to intervene eventually. Of course, those states which have implimented Amendments banning gay marriage were mislead as (Thank You Clinton!) there was already a federal law giving states the right or not to recognize gay marriage (via the Defense of Marriage Act). At any rate, given the direction our Supreme Court has been going, that should worry a great many of us.

Tempo94, I could easily see things going either way. Since the court is majority-Democrat, my first instinct would be to say they would support the recent decision striking down the gay marriage ban. However, please keep in mind that Iowa Democrats are NOT necessarily as liberal as those in other areas of the country. By that some token, though, the state has been moving more and more toward recognizing gay rights. Just this year, the governor signed a sexual orientation and gender-identification protection bill for schools in the state.

Really, anything could happen. There is strong movements on both sides, and it will be a battle. This is not the last you'll hear of this, for sure.

I have a sneaking suspicion, though, that the ban will be struck down in kind of a modern-era Brown vs. Board of Ed. case. It's going to be very exciting.

All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.